All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Gender differences in family communication about organ donation
Unformatted Document Text:  5 patients’ wishes, previous discussions with the deceased about organ donation, contact with organ procurement staff, and request patterns. Other work has also indicated the importance of request patterns (Tartaglia & Linyear, 2000) and that request patterns can be altered with training (Blok et al., 1999; Linyear & Tartaglia, 1999; Morton, Blok, Redi, van Dalen, & Morley, 2000; Sutton, 1998). Attempts to overcome barriers to donation have traditionally focused on education efforts. Health promotion campaigns over the years have been designed to persuade people to donate their organs, and much research has focused on the impact of various communicative approaches. Ford and Smith’s (1991) study of refutational vs. one-sided persuasive messages determined that atypical arguments had more persuasive impact than did typical arguments; their follow-up study concluded that prior thought and intent influence the memorability and persuasiveness of organ donation strategies (Smith, Morrison, Kopfman, & Ford, 1994). Other work has suggested that clearer terminology must be used in messages regarding organ donation (Jasper, Harris, Lee, & Miller, 1991). Research by Kopfman (2000) has indicated that personal values and interpersonal communication influence those who decide to become potential organ donors, although media messages have a stronger impact on those who decide not to donate their organs. She also found that narratives were more effective than statistically based evidence messages (Kopfman, 1995). Sanil, Thompson, and Cusella (1997) discovered more favorable responses to positive than negative affect messages, in that those who heard positive affect messages were more likely to consider organ donation and to find the appeal reassuring. Those who heard negative affect (fear appeal) messages, however,

Authors: Thompson, Teresa., Robinson, James. and Kenny, Wade.
first   previous   Page 5 of 48   next   last



background image
5
patients’ wishes, previous discussions with the deceased about organ donation, contact
with organ procurement staff, and request patterns. Other work has also indicated the
importance of request patterns (Tartaglia & Linyear, 2000) and that request patterns can
be altered with training (Blok et al., 1999; Linyear & Tartaglia, 1999; Morton, Blok,
Redi, van Dalen, & Morley, 2000; Sutton, 1998).
Attempts to overcome barriers to donation have traditionally focused on education
efforts. Health promotion campaigns over the years have been designed to persuade
people to donate their organs, and much research has focused on the impact of various
communicative approaches. Ford and Smith’s (1991) study of refutational vs. one-sided
persuasive messages determined that atypical arguments had more persuasive impact than
did typical arguments; their follow-up study concluded that prior thought and intent
influence the memorability and persuasiveness of organ donation strategies (Smith,
Morrison, Kopfman, & Ford, 1994). Other work has suggested that clearer terminology
must be used in messages regarding organ donation (Jasper, Harris, Lee, & Miller, 1991).
Research by Kopfman (2000) has indicated that personal values and interpersonal
communication influence those who decide to become potential organ donors, although
media messages have a stronger impact on those who decide not to donate their organs.
She also found that narratives were more effective than statistically based evidence
messages (Kopfman, 1995). Sanil, Thompson, and Cusella (1997) discovered more
favorable responses to positive than negative affect messages, in that those who heard
positive affect messages were more likely to consider organ donation and to find the
appeal reassuring. Those who heard negative affect (fear appeal) messages, however,


Convention
All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 5 of 48   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.